26 Cultivated crops damaged by wildlife in the last year
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this report reflect those of the
authors. Whilst every care has been taken in the writing of this report,
the authors accept no responsibility for any resultant errors herein,
any damages or loss whatsoever caused or suffered by any individual or
organisation.
Rights
The information in this report is copyrighted, therefore, copying or
transmitting any part of this report without permission from the authors
may be a violation. However, we encourage dissemination and use of this
report with appropriate citation and acknowledgement.
Suggested citation
Please cite this report as such :
Brehony, P., Tyrrell, P., Muiyuro, R., Kang’ethe, E. 2024. Social
Assessment of Protected Area for Soysambu Conservancy. Sustain East
Africa, Nairobi, Kenya.
Acknowledgements
This Social Assessment of Protected Areas for Soysambu Conservancy is
the result of a collaborative effort between Sustain East Africa,
Soysambu Conservancy, and representatives from communities bordering the
Conservancy. Thank you to the all those who helped to pull this
together.
Particular thanks go to: Helen Jerotich, Community Education Officer
(Soysambu Conservancy); Chief Joseph Mwangi and Assistant Chief Felicah
Mugi of Mbaruk location; Chief Parit Sururu and Assistant Chief Henry
Balozi of Kongasis, Oljorai location; and Chief Simon Mathare and
Assistant Chief Benson Mungai of Kiptangwanyi location.
We would also like to acknowledgement the MCA of Eburru Mbaruk Ward,
Michael Gathanwa, and his ward administration for their insights and
input in highlighting areas where Soysambu Conservancy can continue to
support neighbouring communities.
We also thank the Nyumba Kumi village elders from the three locations
for their input, as well as the dedicated enumerators involved in
carrying out the household surveys: Benedicta Wanjiru, Emmanuel Kooli,
and Paul Waweru.
Summary
Context
The Social Assessment for Protected and Conserved Areas (SAPA) is a
standardised, low-cost and relatively simple approach to assessing
social impacts of protected or conserved areas. SAPA can help identify
positive and negative social impacts of protected or conserved areas,
understand the underlying causes of problems related to governance and
identify actions that could improve the situation. The methodology can
also be used to establish a baseline for social impacts and their
overall contribution to human wellbeing against which changes can be
tracked over time. It is a multi-stakeholder assessment methodology for
use by site-level stakeholders.
Key Findings
Positive social impacts
Based on the findings of the SAPA process, the main positive social
impacts that contributed to household well-being in communities
neighbouring or within Soysambu Conservancy were: 1) Improving access to
water 2) Building or maintaining infrastructure 3) Support for education
4) Support for health projects 5) Outreach services and training
Soysambu conservancy provides water to the community either through
trucks or by building water tanks, ensuring access to clean and safe
water for local residents. Furthermore, support in building or maintaining infrastructure
including police posts, schools, and roads, were reported to enhance the
overall quality of life for community members.
Soysambu conservancy’s initiative to offer sponsorship opportunities for
students, enabling access to education and fostering academic
achievement, was seen as a positive social impact.
Additionally, Soysambu’s contributions to local schools, such as
providing school meals for students, school uniforms, desks, and sports
equipment, positively impact educational outcomes and student
well-being. The Conservancy also provides free guided educational trips
to community members, offering valuable learning experiences.
We appreciate Soysambu for providing land to construct Lady Anne Secondary School
Soysambu conservancy’s support for health projects, including the
provision of equipment to clinics and cancer screening for women,
contributed to improved healthcare access and outcomes within the
community. Additionally, Soysambu Conservancy also provided anti-rabies
vaccinations for dogs and donkeys, demonstrating a commitment to
community health.
Soysambu conservancy also offered outreach services in the form of
training in improved livestock production, health, and waste management,
empowering residents with valuable knowledge and skills.
Soysambu actively participates in environmental conservation
initiatives, such as tree planting, contributing to the preservation of
natural resources and biodiversity. Furthermore, some households also
felt that providing access to firewood also demonstrated a commitment to
community support.
Negative social impacts
Despite efforts to improve potential negative impacts, some persist. Most negative social impacts across the six case studies fall under these main categories: 1) restricted access to services; 2) unequal distribution of benefits; 3) lack of appreciation during emergencies; 4) human-wildlife conflict; 5) tansmission of disease.
Limited access to certain public utilities, such as roads, creates barriers to mobility and community well-being. Some residents claim that the challenges they face affect their daily lives and overall quality of life.
There was also a perceived unfairness in the distribution of benefits, including employment opportunities and community involvement in development projects, perpetuates feelings of exclusion. Some community members feel marginalized and overlooked in resource allocation and decision-making processes, leading to social tensions and disparities.
Furtermore, some respondents expressed that they felt unappreciated by Soysambu Conservancy, particularly when they provided voluntary assistance during emergencies, such as bush fires. This lack of acknowledgment could result in strained relations between the community and the conservancy.
Some respondents also mentioned that they felt disease transmission from wildlife to livestock poses a significant concern to them. A number also mentioned that conflict with wildlife originating from Soysambu resulted in property damage and some injuries, with a lack of compensation (from KWS). In particular, conflict with baboons, vervet monkeys, porcupines, buffalo, and hyenas was mentioned
> My son needs compensation, as he was injured by a buffalo while working in the conservancy
Overall contribution to wellbeing
The survey results indicated that the majority of respondents perceived
Soysambu’s overall contribution to well-being as neutral, taking into
account both positive and negative impacts. There were exceptions,
particularly in Oljorai and Mbaruk locations, where a few respondents
felt that Soysambu had increased their well-being.
75%
of households residing in Soysambu felt the conservancy increased their wellbeing
On the other hand,
12%
of respondents living in Oljorai felt Soysambu had reduced their well-being
Governance
SAPA encompasses four key principles of effective governance:
participation in decision-making, transparency and accessibility to
information, mitigation of negative impacts, and equitable
benefit-sharing process.
Participation
In Mbaruk and Oljorai locations, the majority of people disagree that
there is participation in Soysambu’s decision-making that impacts the
community. However, in Soysambu itself, a large percentage of people
feel that there is some level of participation, particularly in knowing
their community representative for meetings with Soysambu and
communicating with them. In Kiptangwanyi, there is a mix in opinions with
most people feeling that there is no participation, some agreeing that
there is participation, and quite a number do not know whether there is
any participation.
Transparency and access to information
There was overall dissatisfaction with transparency and access to information about decisions that were perceived to affect the communities, notably in Kiptangwanyi, Oljorai, and Mbaruk. Soysambu residents show mixed views.
Mitigation of Negative Impacts
Residents in Kiptangwanyi, Oljorai, and Mbaruk expressed skepticism about how effective measures to mitigate negative impacts like wildlife damage were, while opinions in Soysambu are more divided.
Benefit Sharing Process
There was widespread disagreement across Kiptangwanyi, Mbaruk, and Oljorai regarding perceived fairness in benefit distribution. A few Soysambu residents did feel like there was some benefit sharing.
Rights
Views on respect for rights varied, with differing perceptions across all locations, about whether there was recognition and respect for rights of local women and men.
Recommendations going forward
Based on the results of the surveys and the stakeholder workshops there are mixed perceptions about Soysambu conservancy. on the one hand there were a number of positive impacts, and some positive aspects to governance. On the other hand, there was also widespread dissatisfaction, particularly in the communities neighbouring Soysambu, about the perceived negative impacts of the conservancy, the lack of positive improvements in governance, and the fact that many people felt that Soysambu was having no effect, or a negative effect on the wellbeing of their household.
Nevertheless, the stakeholder workshops demonstrated that there was good will, and that both community representatives and Soysambu conservancy want to engage positively going forward. The survey respondents and workshop participants provided a number of suggestions about the ways in which Soysambu conservancy could take action.
These insights and requests aimed at enhancing social impacts within and around Soysambu Conservancy, promoting sustainable practices, improving community engagement, and ensuring equitable outcomes for all stakeholders.
Although the specific key requests from the community are shown in Table X below in the “Recommendations” section, here we provide a summary of those.
There were requests to support schools and education generally. These included land allocation for new schools, construction of primary schools, installation of facilities like ablution blocks and libraries, and implementation of school feeding programs. Suggestions also encompassed scholarships and ensuring fairness in scholarship provisions. Tied to this, and requests about livestock and agriculture, were also requests to educate farmers on improved methods. We have provided a number of suggestions on this in the “Recommendations” section.
There were also a number of requests for health and hospital facilities, namely to improve healthcare infrastructure, including hospitals, medical equipment, and upgraded dispensaries. Other requests included supporting new maternity wings, staff housing, and outpatient wings.
There was a lot of concern expressed over access and provision of water. Therefore there were requests for infrastructure like dams, boreholes, and water towers. Specific locations highlighted for improvement included Kiungururia and Echareria.
A number of communities rely on livestock as their primary or secondary livelihood. Therefore, there were also a number of livestock focussed requests, including access to grazing fields, provision of fodder and compensation for losses due to wildlife encounters. Stakeholders also emphasized the need for capacity building such as courses on improved livestock management.
There were also requests to support the community to plant tress in a number of areas (e.g. Chamuka springs), to install sanitation points, and overall to continue raising awareness about environmental conservation.
Although communities living in Soysambu conservancy expressed a strong sense of security, most communities outside did not, and therefore there were requests for additional security measures, including the construction of police posts and administrative offices for chiefs.
Furthermore, there were requests for land, either to purchase from Soysambu, or to be provided land to cultivate, or to learn about vegetable farming. There were also some requests for electric fences to improve security.
Finally, in seeking to improve transparency, communication between Soysambu and neighbouring communities, and involvement of communities, there were suggestions to establish regular meetings, to elect representatives specifically for relations with Soysambu, and to work together to foster a positive relationship into the future.
Introduction
Soysambu Conservancy
Soysambu Conservancy is located within the Rift Valley System. It covers
48,000 acres, encompassing the northern and western shores of Lake
Elmenteita. Soysambu Conservancy is renowned for its remarkable
biodiversity, including a population of 170 endangered Nubian Giraffes
and over 450 bird species, notably hosting 28% of the world’s Lesser
Flamingo population. Indeed Lake Elmentaita is one of Kenya’s Key
Biodiversity Areas and RAMSAR sites (a wetland that is of international
importance under the Ramsar Convention). Its rich wildlife habitat is
home to buffalo, leopard, hippo, hyena, jackal, eland, zebra, impala,
Thompson’s and Grant’s Gazelle, waterbuck, reedbuck, klipspringer,
warthog, steinbok, colobus monkey, vervet monkey, and baboons.
Soysambu Conservancy was established as a Not-for-Profit Company in 2007
and works to conserve the Soysambu Estate as a traditional wildlife
area, which supports the integrity of the greater Rift Valley ecosystem,
while promoting sustainable coexistence of wildlife with livestock and
at the same time being relevant to and part of modern-day Kenya.
Soysambu Conservancy wanted to understand more about the social impact
of the conservancy on communities living within and surround the
conservancy. Furthermore, they wanted to use the opportunity of
assessing the social impacts of the Conservancy to listen to what
communities within and surrounding the conservancy had to say about the
positive and negative impacts of the Conservancy. This could also serve
as an opportunity to establish a baseline for Soysambu Conservancy’s
contribution to the well-being of communities, over time.
Social Assessment of Protected Areas (SAPA) approach
The Social Assessment for Protected and Conserved Areas (SAPA), launched
in 2014, responded to a need for a standardised, low-cost and relatively
simple approach to assessing social impacts of protected or conserved
areas (Franks, Small, and Booker 2018).
SAPA is a multi-stakeholder assessment methodology for use by site-level
stakeholders. The methodology is based on a standardised process that
can be replicated across protected or conserved areas while remaining
flexible enough for tailoring to local needs and contexts.
SAPA uses a set of standard assessment questions directly related to
social impacts and governance quality. It also includes a process of
developing site-specific questions that respond to specific needs of
actors.
SAPA can help identify positive and negative social impacts of protected
or conserved areas, understand the underlying causes of problems related
to governance and identify actions that could improve the situation. The
inclusion of a governance and equity assessment in the second edition of
SAPA strengthens the results and action planning processes. Governance
is distinct from management and pays attention to who defines objectives
and how. It also looks at allocation of responsibility and
accountability for delivering on these objectives.
The methodology can also be used to establish a baseline for social
impacts and their overall contribution to human wellbeing against which
changes can be tracked over time. Therefore, the SAPA approach meets the
requirements of Soysambu Conservancy as they seek to understand social
impacts over time, and to listen to feed back from communities living
within and surrounding the conservancy.
Objectives of the Social Assessment
Soysambu Conservancy aims to ensure that they provide value to Kenya,
its people and the wider international community through sustainable
conservation and enjoyment as a national treasure and heritage.
The conservancy is currently expanding its engagement with communities
living within and surrounding the conservancy. Conducting a SAPA will
therefore help them better understand the views, needs, and
opportunities of the surrounding communities.
The primary objective of this assessment therefore was to integrate
conservation initiatives with community development and foster a
positive relationship between Soysambu and their neighbouring
communities, principally by increasing positive impacts and reducing
negative impacts to communities.
Approach and Methods
SAPA overview, process and outputs
The SAPA Assessment uses a mixed methods approach that combines
qualitative data and quantitative data to gather information, assess
results and generate ideas for action in response to the findings.
Throughout the SAPA process, there is an emphasis on linking the steps
to stakeholder engagement, either through discussions, or feedback, or
actions to improve the situation. This ensures that stakeholders,
including communities through their representatives, are effectively
engaged throughout the assessment.
This multi-stakeholder approach increases the accuracy and credibility
of the findings, enhances transparency and ownership of the assessment
process, builds support for action and accountability for
implementation. For those interested, much greater detail can be found
in the SAPA manual Franks, Small, and Booker (2018).
Preparation
Feasibility and planning
Following discussing with Soysambu Conservancy management, it was agreed
that Soysambu met the feasiblity requirements for a SAPA process.
Soysambu began operating in 2007. It was Protected or Conserved Area
that was established and operating with management and governance
systems for at least two years. Furthermore, Soysambu Conservancy
satisfies the second feasibility criterion as its managers and other key
stakeholders can convene for face-to-face meetings at least once during
the assessment process. Additionally, there is a clearly defined zone
covering Soysambu and its neighboring communities. Finally, the managers
of Soysambu were willing to implement specific action plans aimed at
improving social impacts and governance within the conservancy.
In order to plan the SAPA process, together with the Soysambu
management, the Sustain East Africa team put together a work plan with
dates for key steps in the SAPA process, and those responsible for
organising the step, and where relevant, inviting stakeholders, such as
community representatives to participate.
Community Mapping
The aim of community mapping is to ensure that all stakeholders within
or neighbouring the conservancy are considered during the SAPA process.
Soysambu Conservancy provided a detailed map delineating its boundaries
and essential physical features such as roads, rivers, and Lake
Elmenteita. This map also included the locations and boundaries of
communities within and surrounding the conservancy.
Following a meeting and exploratory visit with Soysambu management and
representatives from neighbouring communities in September 2023 it was
decided that this SAPA would focus on key neighbouring villages within
the Oljorai, Kiptangwanyi, and Mbaruk locations, as well as those living
within Soysambu.
Futhermore, at this stage of the process, some of the questions that
would be specifically tailored to the Soysambu context were formulated.
While many of these raised issues that were already aligned with
standard assessment questions, some were articulated as additional
queries in the household questionnaire.
Review existing information
At this stage, Soysambu Conservancy provided reports and meeting minutes
from previous community engagements and projects. These were carefully
reviewed to gain a comprehensive understanding of pertinent background
details that a site profile could be formed. In turn, this allowed us to
ensure that we were able to ensure that the most appropriate positive
and negative social impacts and measures of wellbeing were being covered
in the assessments; that a sufficient number of households would be
sampled; that the assessment would be suitable to the cultural context.
Stakeholder Engagement
Finally, each location was visited, and the assessment was discussed
with the Administrative Chief from the location. This in turn led to
introductions to the heads of village. At this stage, the survey were
able to understand the local context, ensure that community
representatives were willing to participate in group discussions, and to
secure permission to carry out the household surveys.
Scoping
The scoping phase of SAPA is dedicated to defining the assessment’s
boundaries concerning space, time, and issues, prior to delving into
detailed information gathering.
In terms of space, the villages and locations that had been visited and
consulted were already set.
In terms of time, the SAPA primarily addresses social impacts that have
occurred in the past, rather than those anticipated in the future. For
this assessment, a recall period of five years was selected.
SAPA covers various social impact and governance issues. The standard
aspects of assessment include:
The impact of Soysambu and its development activities on people’s
well-being.
Identification of significant negative and positive impacts
resulting from Soysambu and associated conservation and development
initiatives.
Evaluation of the recognition and respect of local women’s and men’s
rights by Soysambu.
Assessment of timely access to pertinent information by local women
and men.
Examination of the effectiveness of measures to mitigate negative
impacts on local women and men.
Evaluation of the equitable distribution of benefits related to
Soysambu within and between local communities.
However, even these aspects of the assessment might overlook important
issues. To address this, as part of the scoping step, a community
meeting and stakeholder workshop is conducted. Furthermore, the
household survey and the second community meeting are also designed to
identify other potential gaps that may exist.
First community meeting and stakeholder workshop
In November 2023, the Sustain team conducted a half-day workshop with
community stakeholders, including 19 participants representing location
chiefs, village representatives, and enumerators recruited from the
communities.
The workshop aimed to familiarize participants with the SAPA methodology
and upcoming household survey questions. It also gave representatives a
chance to raise any outstanding issues that were not being asked about.
This workshop plays a vital role in ensuring the SAPA’s relevance to
local needs, active participation of the key stakeholders, and fostering
ownership of the process among key stakeholders.
Information Gathering
The next step in the process is to gather information through a
household survey. This is then followed once more by a discussion and
feedback in a stakeholder workshop and community meeting. This balanced
approach combines quantitative data from surveys with qualitative
insights from community meetings and stakeholder workshops.
Planning the household survey
The household survey will be the key step to collecting quantitative
data from across the key locations in a statistically representative
manner. Based on timelines, budgets, and the number of villages to
cover, we agreed to interview 180 households, randomly selected from the
target area’s villages.
Therefore, out of 44 villages identified as important, across the 3
selected locations, 18 villages were randomly chosen for the survey.
Within each of these 18 villages, a minimum of 10 households were to be
randomly selected.
The sampling plan was devised based on information from the most recent
national census, information from Administrative Chiefs, accessibility
of locations, estimated survey duration and enumerator requirements.
Table 1: Table of sample size by location
Location
No. of Respondents
% of total
Mbaruk
81
45%
Oljorai
70
39%
Soysambu
20
11%
Kiptangwanyi
10
5%
Location
No. of Respondents
% of total
Mbaruk
81
45%
Oljorai
70
39%
Soysambu
20
11%
Kiptangwanyi
10
5%
Developing household questionnaire
The SAPA facilitation team crafted a series of questions to be piloted,
then tested with enumerators, before being deployed in the household
survey.
The survey incorporated Soysambu-specific social impacts, governance
issues, informed by concerns raised during reconnaissance visits and
reports from the Soysambu Conservancy team. Furthermore, custom
governance statements were developed to address rights, participation,
transparency, and impact mitigation or benefit sharing.
The survey was initially drafted in English, it was then translated into
Swahili. A back-translation process to English ensured accuracy and that
the intended meaning was correct. Adjustments based on feedback from the
pilot survey, training process, and Soysambu Conservancy management were
incorporated, and the final questionnaire was uploaded to the Open Data
Kit (ODK) and KoboToolbox for enumerator use during the survey.
Enumerator Training
In order to ensure that data collection is of the highest standards, the
SAPA process relies on proficiently trained enumerators, capable of
conducting efficient and accurate surveys.
Therefore, 3 enumerators were recruited from within the survey
locations, based on their proficiency in English and Swahili, their good
standing in the community, and the fact that they had at least completed
high school.
In November 2023, the SAPA facilitation team conducted a two day
training sessions which included a detailed run through of all the
questions, the information the survey was to capture, and why this was
important. The enumerators were trained in the use of ODK and
KoboToolbox. The training also included a review of survey and research
ethics, and appropriate behaviour before and after the survey.
The enumerators conducted practice interviews, focused on comprehension
and questionnaire adjustments.
Following successful completion of the training, the enumerators were
equipped with smartphones, battery banks, notebooks, and backpags. They
were clearly instructed on the sampling approach with each enumerator
allocated six villages and instructed to randomly sample 10 households
from each village.
As a final step in the training, the enumerators conducted pilot
interviews with acquaintances. The data from these were reviewed and
analysed and the enumerators were given feedback on their performance.
Conduct Household Survey
As discussed above, the sample size include 18 randomly selected
villages, where a total of 10 households were surveys. In total, 181
households were sampled, over three weeks from November 20th to December
6th, 2023.
Sampling locations included Data collection locations included Kiwanja
Ndege Mkulima, Leleshwa, Pema, Kapkures, Mbaruk, Muranga, Kiambogo,
Ngatta, Mololine, Kelelwa, Soysambu Area, Oldubey, Kapedo, Jogoo,
Echareria, Central Utut, Jolai 1,2, Sleeping Warrior Gate, Jolai Gate,
and Kampi Turkana.
Each survey began with an explanation of the purpose of the survey, how
data would be used, confidentiality measures, the participant’s rights,
and sought their consent before proceeding.
Following each survey, the respondent was given a small token of
appreciation in the form of sugar.
As the survey was being conducted, the facilitation team made random
calls to 11% of all respondents to verify that the survey had taken
place, to ask for any comments or feedback, and to ensure that the
information provided was correct.
No negative feedback or concerns regarding the data collection process
were received.
Figure 1: Map of Soysambu with sample sizes from each locations
Analyse Household Survey
The first step in data analysis was to ensure that there was anonymity.
Therefore, in adherence to the Data Protection Act, 2019, identities and
numbers collected from respondents was removed. This ensured that all
data collected from respondents was handled anonymously, and that no
individually identifiable information pertaining to race, health status,
ethnic social origin, conscience, belief, genetic data, biometric data,
property details, marital status, family details, sex, or sexual
orientation were shared.
The next steps were to use design based inference in R, with the
survey and srvyr packages to calculate population proportions,
standard errors and 95% confidence intervals based on the sample data
collected.
The results from these are presented as tables, graphs, maps, and
percentages in the following section.
Assessing
Second community meeting and stakeholder workshop
The final stages of the SAPA process involve conducting a second
stakeholder workshop, where key findings from the household survey are
shared with representatives of key stakeholders. Any questions raised
during the workshop are addressed, and actionable ideas are presented.
This workshop serves firstly as a review and validation that the data
collected are likely to reflect the realities on the ground, and
secondly as a further information-gathering opportunity. The insights
gathered as part of this discussion can help assist in mitigating
negative social impacts, promoting equitable distribution of positive
impacts, and enhancing governance within the protected area.
At the second workshop in Soysambu, the focus was on discussing
additional ideas for ways in which Soysambu could provide positive
social benefits to the community, that were not sufficiently captured in
the survey responses.
These ideas, detailed below, encompassed community activities,
initiatives by Soysambu Conservancy management, and greater
collaboration with local, regional, or national government entities.
Taking Action
Communicate results
Following the conclusion of Soysambu Conservancy’s SAPA, it is crucial
that the findings are effectively communicated to all relevant
stakeholders. This includes not only the conservancy management team but
also local communities, government authorities, NGOs, and other
interested parties. This has been partly achieved through the second
workshop discussed above.
However, beyond this, clear and transparent communication of the assessment results will help foster understanding,
build trust, and encourage collective action towards addressing
identified issues.
In communicating the results, it is essential to use accessible language
and diverse communication channels to reach different stakeholders
effectively. This may include community meetings, workshops,
newsletters, social media platforms, and formal reports. As was the case
for the second workshop discussed above, engaging in further dialogue
sessions where stakeholders can ask questions and provide feedback on
the assessment findings will improve understanding and ownership of the
process.
Plan actions and monitor progress
Looking ahead, it is important that an action plan to address the
identified issues is put in place. This should outline specific
strategies, activities, timelines, responsibilities, and resources
required to implement interventions.
As was brought up in the second stakeholder workshop, community
representatives called for greater collaboration with local, regional,
or national government entities. Therefore, it will be important to
ensure that the conservancy management, local communities, government
agencies, and potentially other relevant NGOs, are involved in the
action planning process. This will ensure some ownership, prioritising,
and commitment to the proposed interventions.
Once an action plan is in place, it will be essential to establish
mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating progress. By continuously
monitoring progress, Soysambu Conservancy can adapt its strategies and
interventions to meet evolving social needs and ensure the sustainable
management of the protected area.
Findings
Characteristics of the respondents
Household head’s gender, age, and average number of children
Generally, the SAPA household survey resulted in a sample of 181 households, with 113 men and 68 women participating. As the Figure below shows, across all surveyed locations, the number of male respondents exceeded the number of women, with the greatest gender disparity in respondents found in the communities living within Soysambu (see Figure below). Mbaruk on the other hand, had a more balanced gender balance compared to other locations, with 54% male and 46% female participants.
Other household characteristics, including the mean age of the household head, and the average number of children per household, also varied across the surveyed locations, as shown in the table below. Oljorai stood out with the highest mean number of children per household, while Mbaruk had the lowest. Mbaruk also had the highest mean age of the household head, contrasting with Kiptangwanyi, which had the lowest. Soysambu and Kiptangwanyi showed similar mean ages of the household head, but Soysambu had a slightly higher mean number of children.
Figure 2: Gender of respondents
Table 2: Characteristics of households
Location
Mean no. of children
Mean age of household head
Kiptangwanyi
2.5
46.8
Mbaruk
1.8
54.1
OlJorai
3.6
47.0
Soysambu
3.2
45.3
Location
Mean no. of children
Mean age of household head
Kiptangwanyi
2.5
46.8
Mbaruk
1.8
54.1
OlJorai
3.6
47.0
Soysambu
3.2
45.3
Principal livelihoods of the households
Residents surrounding Soysambu Conservancy engage in various economic
activities, each with distinct needs. To the south, adjacent to Samburu,
are pastoralist communities. Along the Pipeline-Elementaita road, there
exists a satellite urban settlement area where minimal agriculture is
practiced. The northern region comprises a mix of satellite urban
communities and pastoralists, while the area along the Nakuru road
towards Gilgil is predominantly occupied by smallholder farmers.
However, as we can see in Figure below, for almost all households, cultivation was the principal activity that contributed to the household’s livelihood. Following this, pastoralism, and vibarua (paid manual labour) were stated in some locations. Finally, in some of the more urbanised areas, people shared that their own business, or a permanent salary (shown as other in Figure below). was the principal livelihood. Figure \(\ref{fig:liveli2}\) below shows that the second most important livelihood shows greater variability across locations.
Figure 3: Map of principal livelihood activities in surveyed households
How long household heads have been in the area
Part of the survey was to understand the proportion of native-born residents versus migrants in the surveyed locations, by asking This was achieved by asking the respondents, “Was the household head born in this community?”
The survey results show that all respondents in the Kiptangwanyi location were not born in the community (note that the sample size in Kiptangwanyi was small, see Table 1). In Mbaruk and Soysambu, a greater percentage of respondents were also not born in the community. This was different in Oljorai where the majority of respondents were been born in the area, with a minority who immigrated into the area.
Figure 4: Was the household head born in this community?
Wealth of households
Based on a number of variables that were recorded during the survey, a
wealth index was constructed. This included whether the household owned
assets such as a car, motorbike, television, radio, generator, smart
phone, water tank, pit latrine, and whether they used mpesa, the
construction material of their house, how often they skipped meals, how
many livestock they had, and how large an area they cultivated. Based on
a principal component analysis, households were categorised into 5
quintiles, and a map of these is shown below, followed by two key
variables in understanding household level wealth, namely how often the
household were forced to skip a meal, and the construction material of
the walls of their house.
Figure 5: Map showing the distribution of wealth quintiles
Positive Social Impacts
Soysambu conservancy’s initiative to offer sponsorship opportunities for
students, enabling access to education and fostering academic
achievement, was seen as a positive social impact by some households.
Additionally, Soysambu’s contributions to local schools, such as
providing school meals for students, school uniforms, desks, and sports
equipment, positively impact educational outcomes and student
well-being. The Conservancy also provides free guided educational trips
to community members, offering valuable learning experiences and
fostering appreciation for conservation efforts.
Soysambu conservancy’s support for health projects, including the
provision of equipment to clinics and cancer screening for women,
contributed to improved healthcare access and outcomes within the
community. Additionally, Soysambu Conservancy also provided anti-rabies
vaccinations for dogs and donkeys, demonstrating a commitment to
community health.
Soysambu conservancy provides water to the community either through
trucks or by building water tanks, ensuring access to clean and safe
water for local residents.
Soysambu conservancy’s support in building or maintaining infrastructure
including police posts, schools, and roads, were reported to enhance the
overall quality of life for community members.
Soysambu conservancy also offered outreach services in the form of
training in improved livestock production, health, and waste management,
empowering residents with valuable knowledge and skills.
Soysambu actively participates in environmental conservation
initiatives, such as tree planting, contributing to the preservation of
natural resources and biodiversity. Moreover, Soysambu offers support to
bush-clearing workers by providing firewood for free, demonstrating a
commitment to employee welfare and community support.
Figure 6: Overall positive impacts across all communities
Positive Impacts by Location
The findings of the household survey reveal diverse perspectives across
the four locations. When the survey respondents were asked about how
important projects previously implemented by Soysambu were to their
households the majority of respondents from Kiptangwanyi location
assigned a rating of zero, indicating little importance. A significant
portion expressed low importance, while only a few acknowledged medium
to high importance, particularly concerning water provision and
infrastructure development.
In Mbaruk location, respondents indicated that the previously mentioned
projects had zero impact on their households, with very few attributing
medium to high importance to them. In the Oljorai location, the
influence of Soysambu Conservancy on the community appears notably
positive. A majority of respondents affirmed the high importance of the
projects to their households, with a significant number rating them as
of medium importance. Fewer respondents indicated zero importance, while
a minimal number expressed low importance.
The findings revealed mixed perceptions among residents within Soysambu
regarding the significance of various projects. While a considerable
number regarded most projects as of high importance, some perceived
certain initiatives e.g sponsorship opportunities for students and
community education programs, as having zero importance to their
households. Consequently, the number of respondents expressing medium
importance to the projects was minimal.
Figure 7: Positive impacts broken down into separate locations
Feelings of security
This was not across the board, but there were clear results that
communities living on Soysambu conservancy felt much more secure than
those living outside. Feeling secure is a crucial contributor to
wellbeing.
Figure 8: How secure do you feel from the risk of theft of your property?
Negative Social Impacts
Although Soysambu Conservancy have made considerable efforts to improve
relationships with communities within and neighbouring the conservancy,
there are still a number of impacts that are having negative impacts on
household well-being.
The findings from discussions with community representatives and the
household surveys indicate that transmission of disease from wildlife
and livestock in Soysambu to local livestock poses a significant concern
for community members. Human-wildlife conflict also dominates in the
area with wildlife originating from Soysambu exacerbating tensions and
challenges for residents. Examples include the damage to crops,
livestock and other property; injury of people; and lack of compensation
for damage and injury by wildlife from Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS)
Moreover, restricted access to certain public utilities, such as roads,
creates barriers to mobility and community well-being.
Respondents also said that Soysambu-related benefits are unfairly
shared, for example, there was main concern on limited employment
opportunities and a lack of prioritisation in employment within
Soysambu. This together with the exclusion of the local community from
involvement in development projects perpetuates feelings of exclusion.
There is also a perceived lack of appreciation from Soysambu Conservancy
when they receive assistance from the community, such as when the
community assists in putting out fires during dry seasons. Limited
access to grazing areas and restrictions on tree cutting within Soysambu
Conservancy compound the challenges faced by local residents.
Figure 9: Overall negative impacts across all communities
Negative Impacts by Location
The assessment findings suggest that respondents in Oljorai location
considered all of the highlighted negative impacts as of high
importance, implying a detrimental effect on their household well-being.
Fewer respondents felt that the impacts were of medium importance while
a number of them fel that some impacts were of zero importance for
example conflict with wildlife, little grazing access to Soysambu and
community not being prioritised in employment by Soysambu.
Opinions among respondents in Kiptangwanyi location were varied when it
came to negative impacts. A significant majority of respondents
highlighted that all negative impacts were of high importance and thus
had a lot of impact on their household wellbeing, except for the
restriction of access to public utilities, where most respondents
expressed a perception of zero importance. Some respondents cited the
negative impacts as having low importance, while others had no opinion
at all.
Figure 10: Negative impacts broken down into separate locations
Damage by wildlife
These are not caused by wildlife from Soysambu, although people often
attribute this to be the case.
Conflict
Based on the results of the household survey, the majority of conflict
with wildlife comes from baboons and vervet monkeys, as well as a few
others, including porcupines and buffalo. For households who have
livestock, hyaenas (not defined which species) were the most frequently
cited. Furthermore, across all areas, thankfully less than 1% (0.9%) of
households reported that a member of their household was injured or
killed by wildlife in the last year.
Households reporting that livestock were damaged by wild animals in the last year
10%
Kiptangwanyi
25%
Mbaruk
50%
Oljorai
0%
Soysambu
Households reporting that crops were damaged by wild animals in the last year
80%
Kiptangwanyi
24%
Mbaruk
17%
Oljorai
4%
Soysambu
Overall contribution to wellbeing
In terms of wellbeing, the survey looked at this from a number of
perspectives. Firstly, the respondents were asked about their own
overall self-assessed well-being. This was achieved by asking the
household head “How’s life?” and explaining that 1 means everything is
very bad and 10 means everything is very good.
Figure 11: Responses when asked: How is your life at the moment?
Figure 12: How has the general wellbeing of your household changed over the last 5 years?
Then, once the respondent was asked about the positive and negative
impacts of Soysambu conservancy, they were asked if they could take into
account all of these impacts discussed, and summarise the overall impact
of Soysambu on the well-being of their household.
Figure 13: The impact of Soysambu Conservancy on the well-being of their household
Finally, in order to understand how the impact of Soysambu Conservancy
on household wellbeing is changing over time, the respondents were asked
how has the contribution of Soysambu to your household’s well-being
changed over the past 5 years?
Figure 14: How has the contribution of Soysambu to your households well-being changed over the past 5 years?
The survey results indicated that the majority of respondents perceived
Soysambu’s overall contribution to well-being as neutral, taking into
account both positive and negative impacts. There were exceptions,
particularly in Oljorai and Mbaruk locations, where a few respondents
felt that Soysambu had increased their well-being.
75%
of those residing in Soysambu felt the conservancy increased their wellbeing
On the other hand,
12%
of respondents living in Oljorai agreed that Soysambu had reduced their overall well-being
Governance
In the context of the Social Assessment of Protected Areas (SAPA),
governance plays a pivotal role, encompassing various aspects such as
power dynamics, relational structures, and mechanisms for
accountability. Unlike management, governance within SAPA is concerned
with decision-making processes, resource allocation, and ensuring the
inclusion of all relevant stakeholders in the conservation framework.
So called “good governance” within SAPA is characterized by: Recognition and Respect for
Rights; Full and Effective Participation; Transparency and Access to
Information; Mitigation of Negative Impacts. As part of the SAPA process
we asked questions about each of these.
Participation in decision-making
Full and effective participation in decision making ensures that all
relevant stakeholders are actively involved in the decision-making
processes which fosters a sense of ownership and inclusivity.
In the communities of Mbaruk and Oljorai, a significant portion of
residents express that they disagreed that they were involved in in
decision-making processes that affect their communities. Conversely,
within Soysambu itself, a notable proportion of individuals perceive a
degree of participation, particularly in terms of awareness about their
community representatives for engagements with Soysambu and the channels
available for communication with them. In Kiptangwanyi, opinions vary,
with some residents indicating a lack of participation, others
acknowledging its existence, and a considerable number chosing to answer
“Don’t know”, when asked about the extent of their involvement in
decision-making processes.
Figure 15: Map of survey locations
Level of influence
One key positive result that did emerge from the survey was that most
household heads felt that they had medium or high levels of influence on
decision making in their communities.
The percentage of households that said they had medium or high levels of
influence in their communities:
100%
Kiptangwanyi
98%
Mbaruk
96%
Oljorai
100%
Soysambu
Transparency and access to information
Transparency and Access to Information: Facilitating transparency
through timely access to relevant information in suitable formats,
thereby promoting openness and trust among stakeholders.
Transparency and timely access to information help to promote openness and trust among stakeholders. To assess this aspect, respondents were given three statements to react to (see Figure below).
In Kiptangwanyi, Oljorai, and Mbaruk locations, results suggest that a substantial proportion of respondents expressed dissatisfaction with the transparency of information. They felt that there were no meetings with Soysambu, and that they did not have timely access to information about decisions affecting the community made by Soysambu. The results were slightly different in the communities living in Soysambu, where although a significant number of respondents disagreed that there was sufficient transparency, a greater proportion agreed with the statements.
Figure 16: Agree/Disagree on statements about transparency and access to information
Mitigation of negative impacts
Mitigation of Negative Impacts: Implementing effective measures to
mitigate any adverse effects on indigenous peoples and local
communities, ensuring their well-being and protection.
Mitigation of negative impacts involves implementing effective measures to address any adverse effects on local communities, safeguarding their wellbeing and interests. This aspect of good governance was assessed through specific statements related to Soysambu and its associated negative impacts, shown in Figure below.
The household survey results show diverse perspectives across locations. In Kiptangwanyi, Oljorai and Mbaruk, most respondents disagreed that an effective system for collecting information on damage caused by wild animals existed, as well a lack of help when serious issues of damage by wild animals did occure. On the contrary, in communities living in Soysambu, the majority agreed with the two statements. This suggests that some strategies do exist, but they are implemented in different ways across the different locations.
There was less consensus across Mbaruk, Kiptangwanyi, and Soysambu regarding Soysambu’s use of effective measures to mitigate the negative impacts of the conservancy, with more respondents feeling like there were measures to mitigate negative impacts and crop damage. The exception here was Oljorai where the majority still disagreed that there were any measures in place.
Figure 17: Agree/Disagree on statements about mitigation of negative impacts
Equitable benefit-sharing processes
Equitable benefit sharing in SAPA refers to ensuring that benefits derived from the conserved or protected area are equitably distributed among relevant stakeholders based on agreed-upon targeting options, thus promoting fairness and social justice. This can be slighty tricky in the case of private, conserved land. Therefore, the statements given to respondents sought to gauge the extent to which there was any perceived benefit sharing, and whether the allocation of benefits was gender balanced (see Figure below).
Across Kiptangwanyi, Mbaruk, and Oljorai locations, almost all respondents disagreed with all statements. A minority of respondents in Soysambu agreed with the statements, which suggests that communities living in Soysambu do receive some benefits that other communities do not.
Figure 18: Agree/Disagree on statements about equitable benefit-sharing processes
Rights
In SAPA, prioritizing recognition and respect for rights of all relevant stakeholders engaged in protected area management is fundamental to good governance. Once more, it is tricky to study this in the context of private conserved land.
In the survey, respondents were asked whether Soysambu recognizes and respects the rights of local women and men. In response to the overall statement, in Oljorai and Soysambu, the majority disagreed with this statement, with a few in Mbaruk and Kiptangwanyi expressing similar views. Conversely, a few respondents in Kiptangwanyi and Mbaruk, as well as most in Oljorai and Soysambu, agreed with the statement.
When it came to the community’s perceived right to harvest firewood, respondents in Soysambu felt that they had rights to harvest firewood. There were mixed responses in all other locations.
Regarding law enforcement staff potentially violating the law or local people’s rights, the majority of respondents from Kiptangwanyi, Oljorai, and Soysambu disagreed. This result goes counter to some of the claims that were made in the open ended questions (see section on Harassment in “From assessment to action” below). Nevertheless, in Mbaruk, the perception was different as most respondents agreed that there were some violations of their rights.
Figure 19: Agree/Disagree on statements about rights
From assessment to action
To capture suggestions from stakeholders, during the survey, respondents
were asked a simple open-ended question: “Are there any other ways, not mentioned, that you think Soysambu could help your community?”.
Furthermore, during the second stakeholder workshop, the 33 participants
were divided into groups that represented their communities, and were
given an opportunity to brainstorm and add further suggestions.
In the following section, we outline the main categories under which
these suggestions fall.
Support for Schools and Education
Soysambu Conservancy has provided land for the construction of Lady Anne
Secondary School. One household participant expressed gratitude to
Soysambu for this initiative. However, there is a recurring call for
greater support for schools and education, as highlighted in both the
open-ended survey questions and the stakeholder workshops.
Specifically, participants made several requests for investments from Soysambu,
including:
Allocation of land between Baraka and Soysambu for the construction
of a primary school and other public utilities, as well as the
relocation of Kiboko Primary School to this land.
Construction of a primary school in Royal Estate.
Installation of ablution blocks in primary schools such as Kapkures,
Kambi Turkana, Oldubei, Olesirwa, Kelelwa, and Olepolos.
Establishment of an Early Childhood Education (ECDE) center in Jogoo
village, addressing a recognized need from community engagement
sessions.
Development of a nursery school in Kiwanja Ndege and Ngatta areas,
along with polytechnics and secondary schools.
Implementation of school feeding programs in Ol Jorai Primary
School.
Creation of a library in the Mololine area to engage the youth.
Provision of transportation for children commuting to Kiboko
Primary.
Furthermore, workshop participants suggested that Soysambu could offer
scholarships to the brightest students from primary schools across all
areas. Some respondents expressed concerns about the fairness of
scholarship provisions, emphasizing the importance of ensuring a fair
and transparent process.
Health and hospital facilities
Perhaps unsurprisingly, support for health initiatives within the
communities was another form of support that was reguarly mentioned.
During the survey, respondents expressed a collective desire for
improved health facilities, including the construction of hospitals,
provision of medical equipment, and upgrades to existing dispensaries.
In the Mbaruk area, one in five respondents echoed the need for expanded
healthcare infrastructure, including a hospital and a better-equipped
dispensary in Echareria. The sentiment was further reinforced during the
stakeholder workshops, with participants emphasizing the importance of
constructing essential facilities such as a maternity wing, staff houses
for health workers, and an outpatient wing in various locations,
including Kiungururia.
Similarly, in Oljorai, some respondents stressed the need for improved
health facilities in Kampi Turkana and Kapkures: “We need a hospital in Kapkures as women are losing children because a hospital is lacking”. The sentiment was echoed during the stakeholder workshops,
where requests for dispensaries at Kampi Turkana and Kapkures, along
with staff housing at the Oljorai health center, were highlighted.
While there were not specific requests from respondents in Kiptangwanyi
during the survey, during the stakeholder workshops, participants
emphasized the importance of equipping the maternity wing at the
Elementaita dispensary in Elementaita village.
Water Provision Services
The need for reliable access to water was a recurring theme among the
communities surveyed. Respondents highlighted the necessity for water
infrastructure such as dams and boreholes to address water scarcity,
especially during dry seasons.
In the Mbaruk area, a significant portion of respondents emphasized the
importance of water infrastructure, including the revival of existing
boreholes and the construction of new ones. Participants specifically
called for a water tower at Kiungururia and a borehole in Echareria
during the stakeholder workshops, indicating the critical need for
improved water access for water that passes through through Kiambogo and
near cultivated land to Soysambu: “Allow access to the water passing through Kiambogo to [Soysambu].”
Similarly, in Kasambara, participants echoed the sentiment for enhanced
water infrastructure, with requests for boreholes at Wamagwathi’s farm
and a pipe extension at Kianyeni village, to address water scarcity in
the region. In particular, participants called for the existing
boreholes near African Forest to be revived.
In Oljorai, a third of those surveyed underscored the necessity for dams
or water pans to mitigate water scarcity, particularly during dry
weather.
Respondents from Kiptangwanyi also expressed a pressing need for
community water provision, with 50% of survey respondents advocating for
improved water access. Stakeholder workshops reiterated the importance
of constructing water points and providing water pipes in key areas to
address water challenges effectively.
Overall, the stakeholder workshops served to emphasize the requests for
water distribution infrastructure (e.g. water points at Mwariki C, water
pipes in Jogoo village), a mega-dam at Soysambu to help harvest water
heading to Elementaita around Maisha poa area, a waterpan in Kampi
Turkana, and a borehole in Ngatta.
Livestock Management
Livestock management also emerged as a significant concern among the
communities surveyed, but particularly among those for whom livestock
are one of their most important livelihoods. The map below shows that
the second most important livelihood for most households, is livestock,
especially in places like Oljorat.
Figure 20: Map of 2nd most important livelihood in surveyed households
Therefore, unsurprisingly, requests and suggestions came primarily from
Oljorai, where most of those surveyed sought assistance in multiple
aspects of livestock management, including access to grazing fields
during dry seasons, provision of grass for livestock, livestock
management education programs, compensation for losses due to wildlife
encounters, and cessation of harassment by security personnel on
herders.
The stakeholder workshops further elucidated the community’s requests,
with a majority emphasizing the need for capacity building on improved
livestock management, access to grazing areas, hay production (some
suggested at Nderit primary school), livestock vaccination, and
infrastructure development such as cattle dips (e.g. at Kambi Shule).
Participants also highlighted the need for measures to mitigate
wildlife-livestock conflict, from Hyaenas in particular, with some
people suggesting the use of traps.
A number of respondents in the Mbaruk area also highlighted the need for
support in sustainable livestock management, as well as grazing access
(they mentioned on “unused land”), education on livestock management,
and access to animal vaccination services and artificial insemination.
Additionally, participants in Kasambara emphasized the long-standing
request for the provision of dairy goats and dairy cattle, underscoring
the community’s desire for diversified livestock options.
Environment and Sanitation
The preservation of the environment and promotion of sanitation also emerged as key priorities and survey respondents and workshop participants emphasized the importance of addressing environmental issues and implementing sanitation measures to improve community well-being.
Respondents from Mbaruk and Oljorai in particular, suggested that Soysambu could address environmental challenges by: installing sanitation points near highways; providing tree seedlings (also mentioned in Oljorai); and raising awareness about environmental conservation.
Additionally, workshop participants emphasized the importance of fencing and tree planting at Chamuka springs to safeguard natural resources and promote environmental sustainability.
Security
Ensuring the safety and security of residents and their property is important for community well-being. While many respondents from communities within Soysambu expressed satisfaction with the prevailing sense of security (see Figure above), it is evident that this is not the case in other areas.
In Mbaruk, 22% of survey respondents identified the need for additional security measures, specifically requesting assistance from Soysambu in constructing a police post in Murang’a Echereria, Mbaruk, and Mololine villages. This sentiment was further emphasized during the stakeholder workshops, with participants additionally advocating for the establishment of a police post in Royal estate.
These calls were echoed by respondents from Kiptangwanyi who also highlighted the need for administrative offices for the chief and assistant chiefs at the Kiptangwanyi chief’s camp.
Land and Fencing
Land usage and fencing emerged as significant concerns among respondents. During the survey and stakeholder workshops, a number of people expressed appreciation for Soysambu’s past initiatives, such as selling land to their fathers in Kiambogo.
In Mbaruk, 16% of respondents expressed various preferences regarding land usage within Soysambu. These included desires to purchase land from Soysambu if it were to become available, allocate portions of land for community purposes such as markets, graveyards, and waste disposal sites, and provide land to squatters at affordable rates.
In Soysambu, 35% of respondents suggested initiatives to optimize land usage which included requests for subsidized land allocations for cultivation purposes, setting aside land for vegetable farming, and advocating for the installation of electric fences around residential areas to bolster security measures.
Community representation
Based on the governance section, most people across all locations disagreed that there was sufficient transparency and access to information (see Figure above) or equitable benefit sharing (see Figure above). In fact, across all locations, most people felt they were not well informed, didn’t have access to timely information about decision made by Soysambu that would affect them, nor that their communities were sharing information with Soysambu. Unsurprisingly, improved community representation emerged as a key recommendation, with survey respondents and stakeholder workshop participants expressing a desire for greater involvement and communication with Soysambu.
For instance, in Mbaruk, a number of respondents emphasized the importance of clear communication from Soysambu regarding community rules and regulations. Additionally, they advocated for the establishment of quarterly general meetings to facilitate open dialogue and transparency. One respondent requested the election of a community representative to enhance community voice and representation.
Similarly, in Oljorai, respondents underscored the importance of fostering positive relationships between Soysambu and local communities. They emphasized the need for community inclusion in decision-making processes and likewise, they suggested holding regular meetings to facilitate ongoing dialogue and collaboration between Soysambu and the community.
Harrassment and compensation
In Oljorai, some respondents highlighted instances where individuals gathering firewood experienced perceived harassment. Additionally, there were reports of individuals feeling harassed during law enforcement activities. Concerns were also expressed regarding perceived delays or lack of compensation from the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) for damage caused by wildlife to crops and livestock. These issues were not reported in other surveyed areas. It will be important for Soysambu to thoroughly investigate these reported incidents to ensure the well-being and safety of community members.
Further suggestions
Less frequently mentioned suggestions, or those posing potential implementation challenges, include prioritizing employment opportunities for community members within the conservancy and facilitating community participation in game drives to observe wild animals within the Soysambu Conservancy.
Recommendations
Here, we outline actionable steps and strategies aimed at enhancing the
conservation efforts and social impact management within Soysambu
Conservancy. Drawing upon the identified challenges and opportunities,
our recommendations seek to foster sustainable practices, improve
community engagement, and promote equitable outcomes for all
stakeholders involved.
Requests from communities
Here we have included all the suggestions that were made by survey respondents, or in the stakeholder workshops, into a table format.
Table 3: Community suggestions for other ways Soysambu could help the community.
Category
Suggestion
Support for Schools and Education
Allocation of land between Baraka and Soysambu for the construction of a primary school and other public utilities, as well as the relocation of Kiboko Primary School to this land.
Construction of a primary school in Royal Estate.
Installation of ablution blocks in primary schools such as Kapkures, Kambi Turkana, Oldubei, Olesirwa, Kelelwa, and Olepolos.
Establishment of an Early Childhood Education (ECDE) center in Jogoo village, addressing a recognized need from community engagement sessions.
Development of a nursery school in Kiwanja Ndege and Ngatta areas, along with polytechnics and secondary schools.
Implementation of school feeding programs in Ol Jorai Primary School.
Creation of a library in the Mololine area to engage the youth.
Provision of transportation for children commuting to Kiboko Primary.
Offering scholarships to the brightest students from primary schools across all areas.
Support for Health and hospital facilities
Construction of hospitals and dispensaries, provision of medical equipment, and upgrades to existing healthcare facilities.
Establishment of a maternity wing, staff houses for health workers, and outpatient wings.
Improvement of health facilities in various locations such as Kampi Turkana and Kapkures.
Equipping the maternity wing at the Elementaita dispensary.
Water Provision Services
Installation of water infrastructure including boreholes and water towers.
Construction of dams, boreholes, and water towers.
Revival of existing boreholes and extension of water infrastructure.
Mitigation of water scarcity through the construction of water pans and pipes.
Livestock Management
Access to grazing fields during dry seasons and provision of grass for livestock.
Education programs on improved livestock management and capacity building.
Compensation for losses due to wildlife encounters and cessation of harassment by security personnel on herders.
Environment and Sanitation
Installation of sanitation points near highways and provision of tree seedlings.
Fencing and tree planting at Chamuka springs.
Raising awareness about environmental preservation.
Security
Construction of police posts in various locations.
Establishment of administrative offices for local authorities.
Land and Fencing
Purchase and allocation of land for community use.
Provision of land for cultivation and installation of electric fences.
Community representation
Clear communication of rules and regulations, and establishment of quarterly general meetings.
Fostering positive relationships and inclusion of the community in decision-making processes.
Harrassment and compensation
Investigation of reported harassment incidents and compensation for wildlife-related damages.
Further suggestions
Prioritizing employment opportunities for community members within the conservancy and facilitating community participation in game drives.
Category
Suggestion
Support for Schools and Education
Allocation of land between Baraka and Soysambu for the construction of a primary school and other public utilities, as well as the relocation of Kiboko Primary School to this land.
Support for Schools and Education
Construction of a primary school in Royal Estate.
Support for Schools and Education
Installation of ablution blocks in primary schools such as Kapkures, Kambi Turkana, Oldubei, Olesirwa, Kelelwa, and Olepolos.
Support for Schools and Education
Establishment of an Early Childhood Education (ECDE) center in Jogoo village, addressing a recognized need from community engagement sessions.
Support for Schools and Education
Development of a nursery school in Kiwanja Ndege and Ngatta areas, along with polytechnics and secondary schools.
Support for Schools and Education
Implementation of school feeding programs in Ol Jorai Primary School.
Support for Schools and Education
Creation of a library in the Mololine area to engage the youth.
Support for Schools and Education
Provision of transportation for children commuting to Kiboko Primary.
Support for Schools and Education
Offering scholarships to the brightest students from primary schools across all areas.
Support for Health and hospital facilities
Construction of hospitals and dispensaries, provision of medical equipment, and upgrades to existing healthcare facilities.
Support for Health and hospital facilities
Establishment of a maternity wing, staff houses for health workers, and outpatient wings.
Support for Health and hospital facilities
Improvement of health facilities in various locations such as Kampi Turkana and Kapkures.
Support for Health and hospital facilities
Equipping the maternity wing at the Elementaita dispensary.
Water Provision Services
Installation of water infrastructure including boreholes and water towers.
Water Provision Services
Construction of dams, boreholes, and water towers.
Water Provision Services
Revival of existing boreholes and extension of water infrastructure.
Water Provision Services
Mitigation of water scarcity through the construction of water pans and pipes.
Livestock Management
Access to grazing fields during dry seasons and provision of grass for livestock.
Livestock Management
Education programs on improved livestock management and capacity building.
Livestock Management
Compensation for losses due to wildlife encounters and cessation of harassment by security personnel on herders.
Environment and Sanitation
Installation of sanitation points near highways and provision of tree seedlings.
Environment and Sanitation
Fencing and tree planting at Chamuka springs.
Environment and Sanitation
Raising awareness about environmental preservation.
Security
Construction of police posts in various locations.
Security
Establishment of administrative offices for local authorities.
Land and Fencing
Purchase and allocation of land for community use.
Land and Fencing
Provision of land for cultivation and installation of electric fences.
Community representation
Clear communication of rules and regulations, and establishment of quarterly general meetings.
Community representation
Fostering positive relationships and inclusion of the community in decision-making processes.
Harrassment and compensation
Investigation of reported harassment incidents and compensation for wildlife-related damages.
Further suggestions
Prioritizing employment opportunities for community members within the conservancy and facilitating community participation in game drives.
Agricultural extension services
In the requests and suggestions from those surveyed and workshop
participants, there were a number of calls for education programs to
improve livelihoods. For most households, the principal livelihoods are
still agriculture based (with Kibarua or livestock for some). Soysambu
has already carried out some form of agricultural extension activity
through the farmer’s seminar on livestock production. This could be an
area that is expanded on to support those in the community who are
engaged in smallholder activities.
An extension programme could be designed to promote new methods and
solutions to inform smallholders on how to increase production (and
income) and become more food secure.
A needs-based assessment would be required for the target community and
tracking impact would be a crucial consideration. Changing farming
practices and behaviours is a particularly challenging objective in the
short-term as behaviours tend to change over longer periods of time and
often proof of success of new practices needs to be demonstrated for
changes in traditional farming practice to be adopted. As such, this
would be a longer-term programme allowing for shifts in both the
knowledge and attitudes of the target community with regards to the
practices being promoted and actually being implemented. Funding of
certain inputs should also be considered for the success of this
programme and for the farmers to be able to adopt some of the practices
being promoted.
An agricultural extension programme could be rolled out in a number of
ways, from inviting interested members of the community to watch videos
promoting new and improved farming methods – through to creating
demonstration farms to impart knowledge in a more practical manner and
allowing for participants to see changes over time.
The tables below set out some examples of how climate smart agriculture
could be promoted to the smallholder community. These suggestion aim to
increase farmer’s knowledge on farming practices that can improve
productivity in crop or livestock agriculture, and how farmers can adapt
their practices to accommodate an ever-changing climate.
Table 4: Agricultural extension - Soil Management
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Soil health
Information sharing on what a soil test is and why it is important to do one e.g. can tell the health of the soil, PH levels, which crops can be grown in your soil and which fertilizer to use.
How to carry out a soil test. Should do a soil test every 3-5 years.
Practical demonstration - how to carry out a crop test.
Potential to fund soil tests for participants. Cost circa 1000 KSH per test.
Conservation agriculture
A way of farming to keep nutrients and moisture in the soil. Helps control pests and diseases. Minimum tillage, mulching, crop rotation
Practical demonstration of all 3 activities.
Soil management
The importance of fertilizer to return nutrients to soil.
Different types of fertilizer and nutrients at different stages of growth.
Manure - helps soil fertility and improves soil health over time – reducing the need for fertilizer.
Practical demonstration of fertilizer and manure application.
Possible provision of inputs for 1 season for participants.
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Soil health
Information sharing on what a soil test is and why it is important to do one e.g. can tell the health of the soil, PH levels, which crops can be grown in your soil and which fertilizer to use.
How to carry out a soil test. Should do a soil test every 3-5 years.
Practical demonstration - how to carry out a crop test.
Potential to fund soil tests for participants. Cost circa 1000 KSH per test.
Conservation agriculture
A way of farming to keep nutrients and moisture in the soil. Helps control pests and diseases. Minimum tillage, mulching, crop rotation
Practical demonstration of all 3 activities.
Soil management
The importance of fertilizer to return nutrients to soil.
Different types of fertilizer and nutrients at different stages of growth.
Manure - helps soil fertility and improves soil health over time – reducing the need for fertilizer.
Practical demonstration of fertilizer and manure application.
Possible provision of inputs for 1 season for participants.
Table 5: Agricultural extension - Maize.
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Planting
Informing participants that maize does not grow well in acidic soils. Soil test can determine this. What can be done if soil is acidic e.g. add lime.
Selecting the best maize variety for the area and using certified seeds (disease free and guaranteed to germinate).
Consider planting drought resistant crops too e.g. maize and sorghum.
Preparation of land for planting e.g. minimum tillage, marking planting lines, digging planting holes and manure and fertilizer application.
Plant beans between maize rows to boost soil health.
Practical demonstration of how to plant and education session on importance of certified seeds and contingency crops.
Management
Importance of weeding, fertiliser and when do apply, soil testing (to gauge best fertilizer).
Practical demonstration.
Pests and diseases
Plant certified seeds, keep farm weed free and rotate crops each season.
Scout for pests and diseases regularly and treat them as you see them.
How to deal with plants once diseased.
Education session e.g videos.
Storage
The importance of harvesting and storing appropriately e.g. Dry maize thoroughly for 2-3 weeks on tarpaulin in the sun.
If storing in a sisal sack – treat maize first with pesticide (can’t be eaten for 6 months after treating).
Practical demonstration and education on alternative storage methods e.g. Hermetic bags.
Possible funding of hermetic bags for participants.
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Planting
Informing participants that maize does not grow well in acidic soils. Soil test can determine this. What can be done if soil is acidic e.g. add lime.
Selecting the best maize variety for the area and using certified seeds (disease free and guaranteed to germinate).
Consider planting drought resistant crops too e.g. maize and sorghum.
Preparation of land for planting e.g. minimum tillage, marking planting lines, digging planting holes and manure and fertilizer application.
Plant beans between maize rows to boost soil health.
Practical demonstration of how to plant and education session on importance of certified seeds and contingency crops.
Management
Importance of weeding, fertiliser and when do apply, soil testing (to gauge best fertilizer).
Practical demonstration.
Pests and diseases
Plant certified seeds, keep farm weed free and rotate crops each season.
Scout for pests and diseases regularly and treat them as you see them.
How to deal with plants once diseased.
Education session e.g videos.
Storage
The importance of harvesting and storing appropriately e.g. Dry maize thoroughly for 2-3 weeks on tarpaulin in the sun.
If storing in a sisal sack – treat maize first with pesticide (can’t be eaten for 6 months after treating).
Practical demonstration and education on alternative storage methods e.g. Hermetic bags.
Possible funding of hermetic bags for participants.
Table 6: Agricultural extension - Livestock
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Cows – Housing
Importance of good housing and what a cow shed should consist of e.g. Sleeping area, walking area, feeding area, milking place and calf pen.
Use concrete flooring.
Clean daily and use disinfectant.
Practical demonstration.
Cows – feeding
Ensure good yields with provision of fodder crops, protein supplements (dairy meal, legume plants) along with vitamins and minerals.
What the average healthy cow needs to produce well.
Education session e.g. talk from experts or videos.
Cows (dairy) - fodder
What grasses can be planted directly into the field and creating a nursery for other fodder grasses.
Practical demonstration.
Cows (dairy) – Hay
Good for adapting to the changing climate.
How to make it.
Practical demonstration how and when to cut grass, drying it and storage.
Cows (dairy) – Silage
Planning for the dry season. How to make it and how long it can be stored for.
Practical demonstration on how to make and store silage.
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Cows – Housing
Importance of good housing and what a cow shed should consist of e.g. Sleeping area, walking area, feeding area, milking place and calf pen.
Use concrete flooring.
Clean daily and use disinfectant.
Practical demonstration.
Cows – feeding
Ensure good yields with provision of fodder crops, protein supplements (dairy meal, legume plants) along with vitamins and minerals.
What the average healthy cow needs to produce well.
Education session e.g. talk from experts or videos.
Cows (dairy) - fodder
What grasses can be planted directly into the field and creating a nursery for other fodder grasses.
Practical demonstration.
Cows (dairy) – Hay
Good for adapting to the changing climate.
How to make it.
Practical demonstration how and when to cut grass, drying it and storage.
Cows (dairy) – Silage
Planning for the dry season. How to make it and how long it can be stored for.
Practical demonstration on how to make and store silage.
Table 7: Water Management
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Rainwater harvesting
How to build a rainwater harvesting system by fixing gutters to roofs and connecting to a tank. Building a water pan that collects and stores surface run off water for crops.
Demonstration on how to create gutters on roofs. Demonstration of creating a water pan. Possible funding of materials e.g. water storage tanks, gutters.
Water management
Installing a drip irrigation system to save time and money. How solar power can also be used e.g. solar panels and solar pumps.
Demonstration of drip irrigation system. Possible funding of tanks, irrigation materials.
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Rainwater harvesting
How to build a rainwater harvesting system by fixing gutters to roofs and connecting to a tank.
Building a water pan that collects and stores surface run off water for crops.
Demonstration on how to create gutters on roofs.
Demonstration of creating a water pan.
Possible funding of materials e.g. water storage tanks, gutters.
Water management
Installing a drip irrigation system to save time and money.
How solar power can also be used e.g. solar panels and solar pumps.
Demonstration of drip irrigation system.
Possible funding of tanks, irrigation materials.
Table 8: Financial literacy
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Budgeting
What is it? Why it’s important.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Loans
Why take a loan e.g. farm inputs. Type of loan e.g. bank/SACCO/Chama.
Paying it back, interest, collateral.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Savings
Why save e.g. gets your through poor yields, buying inputs etc. Work out how much you can afford to save, where to put your money e.g. a bank etc.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Insurance
Why? Changing weather and unexpected losses. How insurance works etc.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Budgeting
What is it? Why it’s important.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Loans
Why take a loan e.g. farm inputs. Type of loan e.g. bank/SACCO/Chama.
Paying it back, interest, collateral.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Savings
Why save e.g. gets your through poor yields, buying inputs etc. Work out how much you can afford to save, where to put your money e.g. a bank etc.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Insurance
Why? Changing weather and unexpected losses. How insurance works etc.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Franks, Phil, Rob Small, and Francesca Booker. 2018. Social Assessment for ProtectedAreas (SAPA): MethodologyManual for SAPAFacilitators. 2nd edition. London: IIED.
Lumley, Thomas. 2019. “Survey: Analysis of Complex Survey Samples. R Package Version 3.35-1.”
R Core Team. 2019. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org.
Appendix
Appendix 1 - Sample frame
Table 9: Sampling of households from locations and villages
Location
Village
Estimated No. of HHs
Selected
Gilgil
Kikopey
Gilgil
Karura
Gilgil
Kasarani
Kiptangwanyi
Jogoo
600
yes
Kiptangwanyi
Mwariki C
Kiptangwanyi
Elmentaita
200
Kiptangwanyi
Bombo
250
Kiptangwanyi
Dam
150
Kiptangwanyi
Old game
Kiptangwanyi
Miti Mingi
Mbaruk
Muranga
90
yes
Mbaruk
Mbaruk Marura
100
Mbaruk
Pema
200
yes
Mbaruk
Kiwanja Ndege Mkulima
5000
yes
Mbaruk
Kiambogo
70
yes
Mbaruk
Kahuho
200
Mbaruk
Mololine
80
yes
Mbaruk
Kasambara
100
Mbaruk
Kiwanja Ndege
200
Mbaruk
Leleshwa
80
yes
Mbaruk
Echareria
300
yes
Mbaruk
Mbaruk
500
yes
Oljorai
Oldubey
260
yes
Oljorai
Kelelwa
282
yes
Oljorai
Central Utut
178
yes
Oljorai
Kapkures
274
yes
Oljorai
Elementaita Munyaka
600
Oljorai
Lokichogio
400
Oljorai
Kapedo
189
yes
Oljorai
Central hall
700
Oljorai
Kongasis
Oljorai
Block D
500
Oljorai
Gema
400
Oljorai
Kampi shule
400
Oljorai
Kongasis A
800
Oljorai
Kongasis B
1300
Oljorai
Kongasis Centre
1200
Oljorai
Ngatta
250
yes
Oljorai
Kampi Turkana
117
yes
Soysambu
Head office
92
Soysambu
Soysambu area
183
yes
Soysambu
Melia Nyeupe/borehole/nginegii
28
Soysambu
Jolai 1, 2, sleeping warrior, jolai gate
50
yes
Soysambu
Congreve area
11
Theme
Content
Disbursement of information
Budgeting
What is it? Why it’s important.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Loans
Why take a loan e.g. farm inputs. Type of loan e.g. bank/SACCO/Chama.
Paying it back, interest, collateral.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Savings
Why save e.g. gets your through poor yields, buying inputs etc. Work out how much you can afford to save, where to put your money e.g. a bank etc.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Insurance
Why? Changing weather and unexpected losses. How insurance works etc.
Education session – talk given by an expert or video.
Appendix 2 - Additional data
Figure 21: Map of second most important household livelihood
Figure 22: Livestock as tropical livestock units, per household
Figure 23: Did the household cultivate crops in the last year
Figure 24: No. of acres cultivated by the household in their location, in the last year
Figure 25: Livestock damaged by wildlife in the last year
Figure 26: Cultivated crops damaged by wildlife in the last year
Social Assessment of Protected Areas (SAPA) approach
The Social Assessment for Protected and Conserved Areas (SAPA), launched in 2014, responded to a need for a standardised, low-cost and relatively simple approach to assessing social impacts of protected or conserved areas (Franks, Small, and Booker 2018).